[dropping a pile of cc'ed addresses] Quoting Simon Josefsson (2026-02-20 14:50:28) > Dominik George <[email protected]> writes: > > > this is the whole point of making the Uploader field optional. > > > When absent, it means that every team member is equally in chage > > > for the packag > > What does this entail? Do I constantly have to monitor upstream? Do > > I, personally, get all the maintainer duties? And everyone else in > > the team as well? > > No. The package is a shared responsibility, which is my perception > of the point of doing team-maintained package in the first place. If > you don't want shared responsibility, then why team-maintain > something?
How can I assess, as a concerned Debian developer, whether everybody or somebody or nobody in a team are responsible for the package? If the answer is "ask the team" then why is the Uploaders field ever relevant? I mean, the MIA team and anyone else concerned about a package can always "just ask" - why should we need to declare ahead of time what individuals take responsibility for, when we play loose with teams? > It is fine for people to have the single-maintainer model and still > be able to do what they want. Nobody has suggested to remove the > Uploaders field. Only to make it optional, for those who prefer > another way. What do you mean by "do what they want"? Isn't it those arguing for making the Uploaders field optional for team-maintained packages that wants to "do what they want"? In what ways can maintainers of single-maintainer packages "do what they want"? - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ * Sponsorship: https://ko-fi.com/drjones [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: signature
